People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say - Politics - Nairaland
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Politics / People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say (7205 Views)
PDP Releases Press Statement On AIT Ban, Says It's Dangerous For Democracy / Only PDP Can Offer Internal Democracy To Nigerians - Mohammed Abacha / Gov. Akpabio Bringing The Dividends Of Democracy To The People In His First Four (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (Reply) (Go Down)
| People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ektbear: 1:57am On Mar 06, 2012 |
The democratic process relies on the assumption that citizens (the majority of them, at least) can recognize the best political candidate, or best policy idea, when they see it. But a growing body of research has revealed an unfortunate aspect of the human psyche that would seem to disprove this notion, and imply instead that democratic elections produce mediocre leadership and policies. The research, led by David Dunning, a psychologist at Cornell University, shows that incompetent people are inherently unable to judge the competence of other people, or the quality of those people's ideas. For example, if people lack expertise on tax reform, it is very difficult for them to identify the candidates who are actual experts. They simply lack the mental tools needed to make meaningful judgments. As a result, no amount of information or facts about political candidates can override the inherent inability of many voters to accurately evaluate them. On top of that, "very smart ideas are going to be hard for people to adopt, because most people don’t have the sophistication to recognize how good an idea is," Dunning told Life's Little Mysteries. He and colleague Justin Kruger, formerly of Cornell and now of New York University, have demonstrated again and again that people are self-delusional when it comes to their own intellectual skills. Whether the researchers are testing people's ability to rate the funniness of jokes, the correctness of grammar, or even their own performance in a game of chess, the duo has found that people always assess their own performance as "above average" — even people who, when tested, actually perform at the very bottom of the pile. [Incompetent People Too Ignorant to Know It] We're just as undiscerning about the skills of others as about ourselves. "To the extent that you are incompetent, you are a worse judge of incompetence in other people," Dunning said. In one study, the researchers asked students to grade quizzes that tested for grammar skill. "We found that students who had done worse on the test itself gave more inaccurate grades to other students." Essentially, they didn't recognize the correct answer even when they saw it. The reason for this disconnect is simple: "If you have gaps in your knowledge in a given area, then you’re not in a position to assess your own gaps or the gaps of others," Dunning said. Strangely though, in these experiments, people tend to readily and accurately agree on who the worst performers are, while failing to recognize the best performers. The most incompetent among us serve as canaries in the coal mine signifying a larger quandary in the concept of democracy; truly ignorant people may be the worst judges of candidates and ideas, Dunning said, but we all suffer from a degree of blindness stemming from our own personal lack of expertise. Mato Nagel, a sociologist in Germany, recently implemented Dunning and Kruger's theories by computer-simulating a democratic election. In his mathematical model of the election, he assumed that voters' own leadership skills were distributed on a bell curve — some were really good leaders, some, really bad, but most were mediocre — and that each voter was incapable of recognizing the leadership skills of a political candidate as being better than his or her own. When such an election was simulated, candidates whose leadership skills were only slightly better than average always won. Nagel concluded that democracies rarely or never elect the best leaders. Their advantage over dictatorships or other forms of government is merely that they "effectively prevent lower-than-average candidates from becoming leaders." http://news.yahoo.com/people-arent-smart-enough-democracy-flourish-scientists-185601411.html |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by Kilode1: 2:21am On Mar 06, 2012 |
Their (democracies) advantage over dictatorships or other forms of government is merely that they "effectively prevent lower-than-average candidates from becoming leaders" I'm embarassed to admit that my country may not even meet this low threshhold with the kind of leaders we've managed to produce. But I'll offer an excuse, technically we are not a democracy, we are loosely a dictatorship, an Oligarchy. So maybe it's not our fault, yet  |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by Kilode1: 2:26am On Mar 06, 2012 |
Readers, please beware and watchout for Sagamite. . . I predict the dude will go into a joyous epileptic fit at the sight of this topic |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ektbear: 2:30am On Mar 06, 2012 |
This jibes with what I've observed, both in the real world and a variety of internet forums (including this one.) One of the basic assumptions of democracy is that people are on average competent. Which in most large populations is false. However, democracy seems to be good at choosing slightly above average candidates/ideas rather than the best people/ideas. With non-democracy, there is a higher chance of disaster happening, I suppose. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by DuduNegro: 2:55am On Mar 06, 2012 |
It is refreshing to talk about fundamental needs for a change. This article is speaking from an American democracy point of view, which unfortunately is the model for democracies practiced in more than three quarter of democratic geovernments around the world. What is the confidence level that democracy will flourish in a selective population of people with genius intellect? Until a study can prove that democracy practiced by intellectuals is far more successful and sustainable than democracy practiced by less intelligent people, this study is nothing more than spewing statistics and inverted numbers to "earn a living".  |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by Beaf: 2:59am On Mar 06, 2012 |
I now understand why some people accept Tinubu as their leader. David Dunning, a psychologist at Cornell University, claims that these people simply lack the mental tools to make judgemts about stuff like drugs (eg cocaine), forgery (eg "Toronto" certificates), lies (a man who has "no" family history). . . Who woulda thunk it?   www.nairaland.com/attachments/524033_TinubuTif_jpg4a6f1ebf2f823fa79b6b462d5a62baa6  I always knew it! Thank you, David Dunning! Lol! |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ektbear: 3:06am On Mar 06, 2012 |
Dudu_Negro: I don't follow your argument. Suppose that people are fundamentally not able to recognize good ideas or talented individuals, as this study suggests. Then doesn't this suggest that democracy will always produce sub-optimal outcomes? You can never select the best leaders if people (by their very nature) don't have the ability to successfully recognize exceptional ability. I'm not saying that we should conclude that the authors of the study are correct. They might be wrong. But the point is that some of the assumptions we make about democracy and why it is successful and when it can be successful might be wrong. See the point? |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by Kilode1: 3:35am On Mar 06, 2012 |
Ok, Ekt-bear and Negro, Beaf too (is he's not too busy looking up funny Tinubu gifs  )Do you guys think the Chinese model is better? As in, better than leaving things at the mercy of the masses, where you might have millions of "dumb" people choosing a leader? Can we say the Chinese Central Committe and the National Peoples Congress are Intelligent organizations? A pool of political brainiacs entrusted with the power to elect a smart leader? Is the Chinese Model better than this American/Roman Model of election? My opinion is not expressed above, I'm just asking questions. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ektbear: 3:40am On Mar 06, 2012 |
I dunno too much about the Chinese government or how it works. Singapore though. . . having read Lee Kuan Yew's book, I prefer their model to say US/European-style democracy, or whatever it is that we have in Nigeria. But then again, this assumes brilliant and selfless leadership is available. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by Beaf: 3:43am On Mar 06, 2012 |
Kilode?!: The Chinese model is superior, but it requires discipline which the average Nigerian forbids. Foisting such a model on Nigerians will require rivers of blood; at least a quarter of the population would have to die (99% of police, customs, civil service, business men, politicians and "the common man" . |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by Kilode1: 3:52am On Mar 06, 2012 |
@Ekt_bear yes, some people consider Lee Kuan Yew a benvolent Dictator, an oxymoron really. In china's case, Maybe Chairman Mao (too brutal though) preferably Deng Xiaoping. @Beaf, Do you really think Nigerians are inherently averse to discipline? I'm not so sure that is correct, I must confess I see your point about the price me might have to pay. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ojogbontomoye: 3:53am On Mar 06, 2012 |
Explains why some people see nothing wrong with Tinubu as their leader/leader of ACN. . . Sup EKt bear? Smartest NLer. so smart he even posted a research article that clearly does not favor his reputation. Sup Beaf? |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ektbear: 4:04am On Mar 06, 2012 |
Kilode?!: Whatever he is, he is the type of leadership pretty much anyone who wants a good country would want. Well, let me not put it like that. . . some people prioritize "freedom" over economic prosperity (I put the term in quotes because it is a difficult concept to define.) So for them perhaps a guy like LKY isn't so desirable. And maybe for them pure democracy is best. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by DuduNegro: 4:08am On Mar 06, 2012 |
ekt_bear: Ekt_, I see your point my brother. I believe that people are driven by self-interest to make choices which is close, not necessarily the best. . . . but that which is acceptable amongst the various options presented to them and in the hope for preservation. I can therefore choose a candidate who I believe will promote my interest for political lobbying, or I may forgo that option and choose instead a candidate who has promised and is determined upon winning the election to demolish all the project housing in New York and send their residents to homeless shelters, even though I am in no way threatened or affected if they continued to reside in their projects. So we must ask, what forms these choices and why is there no political filter or checks to purge such vanities? Is is truly a case of people intelligence as suggested by this research or are there other suspect factors upon which the people are involuntarily and ignorantly casting their electoral votes? Are we choosing who we want, or are we accepting, by virtue of our votes, who was pre-selected for us? Kilode, I am not familiar with the Chinese system but I do agree that it is not totally a political system. It also has a cultural mystic order interwoven into it. So that a political miscalculation is not just a career impacting event but can also translate into a fraternal order betrayal. Hence the apparent caution and high discipline with which they operate in that democracy. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ektbear: 4:11am On Mar 06, 2012 |
I guess implicitly the study values democracy for the tangible benefits it brings. Not in and of itself. Some might prefer democracy even if it always led to worse outcomes, since it at least gives people the right to expression their (potentially very wrong) opinions. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ojogbontomoye: 4:17am On Mar 06, 2012 |
ROTFL. This thread has huge potential. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ojogbontomoye: 4:21am On Mar 06, 2012 |
These article reminds of some famous intelligent disporans who somehow know what is best for us locals. ***wink*** ****wink**** ****wink**** |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by bittyend(m): 4:35am On Mar 06, 2012 |
This beaf guy has to be the dumbest paid publicist for PDP! You can't endear your party to people by cursing out rivals - you sell your party's achievements - and people will align with you; if they like what you're selling. Beaf a la olodo omo ibo, mechenu! |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by bittyend(m): 4:41am On Mar 06, 2012 |
The so-called is not really for everyone. I think Nigeria will thrive better under the Chinese system. Love us or loathe us - Africans are not individualistic people like the Westerners; we're more community oriented like the Chinese, and we need something like a dictator at the center into install discipline in the populace. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ektbear: 4:43am On Mar 06, 2012 |
The problem with strongman is that 90% of the time you get a Mobuto Sese Seko or the equivalent rather than a Lee Kuan Yew |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ojogbontomoye: 4:46am On Mar 06, 2012 |
ekt_bear: Reminds me of a famous disaporan here on NL who supported ACN so passionately during the election cycle but is now regretting his intelligent decision. The research, led by David Dunning, a psychologist at Cornell University, shows that incompetent people are inherently unable to judge the competence of other people, or the quality of those people's ideas. For example, if people lack expertise on tax reform, it is very difficult for them to identify the candidates who are actual experts. They simply lack the mental tools needed to make meaningful judgments. Reminds me of another intelligent disporan here on Nl who was so certain of Amosuns/ACNs ideas that he made it his job to campaign for them here on NL. As a result, no amount of information or facts about political candidates can override the inherent inability of many voters to accurately evaluate them. On top of that, "very smart ideas are going to be hard for people to adopt, because most people don’t have the sophistication to recognize how good an idea is," Dunning told Life's Little Mysteries. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm He and colleague Justin Kruger, formerly of Cornell and now of New York University, have demonstrated again and again that people are self-delusional when it comes to their own intellectual skills. Really? EKt Bear, what say you to this? Over sabi sabi disaporans. lol |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ojogbontomoye: 4:48am On Mar 06, 2012 |
Of course. Our intellectuals, always using the most extreme, scariest examples to support their moot point. I am surprised Mr. Intellectual didnt mention Hitler or Idi-Amin? |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by Nnenna1(f): 4:49am On Mar 06, 2012 |
Years ago I would have laughed at the subject title, but I honestly am beginning to believe that this is true. Nothing is black and white anyway - whoever says that dictatorship can never work should take a look at Singapore. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ojogbontomoye: 4:54am On Mar 06, 2012 |
Nnenna1: What? 90% of dictatorship produce Mobuto Sese seko-esques, according to our NL progressives/intellectuals. Why mention Singapore, Lee Kuan yew, Jerry Rawlings, Muhammad Buhari when you can easily point fingers at Mobutu Sese seko et al? |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ektbear: 5:00am On Mar 06, 2012 |
Hitler as a leader really was good up until he pursued warfare in the rest of Europe and genocide. The German economy performed much better under him than the previous 20 years or so. Remember, he made Time magazine Man of the Year. If he'd not pursued war in Europe, we'd just remember him as some amazing leader who rebuilt a shattered people/nation into a strong country again. I dunno, if you can get a Hitler kind of guy minus some of the major blunders he made, you'd have a pretty good leader. Imagine ~20 years after getting your azz kicked by the world in a war, rebuilding your country into the strongest nation in Europe. Clearly the guy had a lot of talent. Hitler definitely was a bad human being and such, but certainly there was a point where his contributions were far more positive than negative. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by bittyend(m): 5:05am On Mar 06, 2012 |
The problem with strongman is that 90% of the time you get a Mobuto Sese Seko or the equivalent rather than a Lee Kuan Yew The problem is that the these so-called African "strongman" or "strongmen" like Mobutu, Idi Amin, Babangida, Abacha and the rest - are not really "dictators" per se; they're Western puppets. These people were just installed there as overseers for Washington and Zurich. They were not the ones pulling strings; they were under orders from the masters. I won't mind Nigeria having someone like Gaddafi (without his narcissistic and eccentric attitudes) at the center - and the whole country divided into regions, based on ethnicity - to allow each region grow at their own pace. Each region should also have their own laws, based on their culture. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by bittyend(m): 5:07am On Mar 06, 2012 |
@ojogbontomoye Murtala Muhammed's regime is also a good example of dictatorship that can work - but too bad, he died too soon. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by ektbear: 5:10am On Mar 06, 2012 |
See I don't like Gadaffi either. I don't think the guy was exceptionally competent. What exactly did he do that anybody who is paramount ruler of an underpopulated but extremely oil-rich country couldn't do? Gadaffi is just an ordinary guy. . . no remarkable talent or ability, imo. You want a guy who can make something out of nothing, someone who adds a ton of value. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by bittyend(m): 5:13am On Mar 06, 2012 |
One other thing, I don't think capitalism is healthy for an African setting - since we're more community based people. A mixture of both Capitalism and Socialism, will definitely take us to the promised land. The American system of government we've been copying since the Ironsi regime has been our greatest problem - it hasn't worked for us, and I doubt it ever will. We need a complete overhaul of the whole system, and try something new. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by Nnenna1(f): 5:21am On Mar 06, 2012 |
ojogbontomoye: Most democratic societies are not exactly working either. Pretty much all forms of government are imperfect. Some more imperfect than others, I agree. But there is at least one success story that we can think of. Peaceful Democracy (Sweden, USA), Benevolent Dictatorship (Singapore under Lee Kuan Yew), Stable Monarchy (Monaco, Luxembourg), and the one-off Religious State(Rome, UAE) exist. Rainbows and Sunshine - as long as it fits properly with the masses. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by bittyend(m): 5:23am On Mar 06, 2012 |
See I don't like Gadaffi either. I don't think the guy was exceptionally competent. What exactly did he do that anybody who is paramount ruler of an underpopulated but extremely oil-rich country couldn't do? Don't forget Libya was under sanctions for more than 30years - and King Idris before him, who was a western puppet, had the same resources and no sanctions; but Libyans were poorer under him. |
| Re: People Aren't Smart Enough For Democracy To Flourish, Scientists Say by bittyend(m): 5:25am On Mar 06, 2012 |
Peaceful Democracy (Sweden, USA), USA is not a peaceful Democracy - people are selected in the US of A. |
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (Reply)
Projects: Ugwuanyi Has Shown Nsukka Light Of The Day – Royal Fathers / How Can Nigeria Bank Justify 30% Interest Rate On Loan? / ACN-Ribadu/Ngige, How Feasible?
(Go Up)
| Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 65 |